ERIC ED602295: Mathematics Teaching Anxiety Scale: Construction, Reliability and Validity

2019·1.6 MB·English

by  ERIC

International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education
2019, Vol. 6, No. 3, 506–521
https://dx.doi.org/10.21449/ijate.625423

Published at http://www.ijate.net http://submit.ijate.net/en Research Article

Mathematics Teaching Anxiety Scale: Construction, Reliability and Validity

Vesile Alkan 1,*, Tolga Coşguner 1, Yücel Fidan 1

1Pamukkale University, Faculty of Education, Kınıklı Campus, 20070, Denizli, Turkey

ARTICLE HISTORY Abstract: This study aimed to develop mathematics teaching anxiety scale
for prospective primary school teachers. It was designed based on survey
Received: 27 June 2019
method and conducted with four sampling group consisting of 956
Revised: 18 August 2019 prospective primary school teachers at Education Faculties in Turkey. First
Accepted: 25 September 2019 sampling group was consisted of 404 prospective primary school teachers
and 96 out of it were involved in the application of open-ended questions
and 308 were involved in exploratory factor analysis. 305 prospective
KEYWORDS
primary school teachers in the second sampling group participated in the
Mathematics anxiety, confirmatory factor analysis, 108 prospective teachers in the third group
Mathematics teaching anxiety were involved in criterion validity and 139 prospective teachers in the fourth
Prospective teachers, one participated in the test-retest reliability analysis. As a result of the
principal component analysis of the Mathematics Teaching Anxiety Scale
Reliability,
(MTAS), it was found that the scale indicating single factor structure and
Validity,
consisting of 31 items (47.43% of the total variance). After suggested
Scale
modifications, the scale MTAS was constructed with 19 items. 12 items
were removed from the scale and the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)
was carried out with 19 items. According to CFA results (0≤X2 / df =
1.483≤2, RMSEA = 0.040, RMR = 0.050, AGFI = 0.908, TLI = 0.972, CFI
= 0.976, IFI = 0.976, GFI = 0.928, NFI = 0.930 and RFI = 0.919), it was
confirmed that the scale structure was consisting of 19 items and one
dimension. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the final form of
Mathematics Teaching Anxiety Scale was calculated as 0.93.
1. INTRODUCTION
A global improvement in Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and being an
interconnected world cause differences in not only individuals’ social lives but also their school
lives. The rapid change in the world enables individuals to share their knowledge effortlessly
and this situation results in being aware of improvements and innovations around the world.
Due to these changes, the content of education in terms of disciplines and teaching strategies
and styles of them are also changing (Voogt & Roblin, 2010; Trilling & Fadel, 2009).
Students of new world need to gain a set of competencies that would help them better coping
with the compulsive demands of 21st century. In this sense, it could be said that mathematics
is crucial for 21st century skills in that it enables to think analytically, critically and creatively
which then enable to gain problem solving and reasoning skills. This means mathematics helps
thinking analytically, having better problem-solving skills and having better reasoning abilities.

CONTACT: Vesile ALKAN  [email protected]  Pamukkale University, Faculty of Education, Kınıklı
Campus, 20070, Denizli, Turkey
ISSN-e: 2148-7456 /© IJATE 2019
506
Int. J. Asst. Tools in Educ., Vol. 6, No. 3, (2019) pp. 506–521
These skills are significant in providing individuals to find out the way of solving problems and
looking for solutions in their lives. Therefore, learning and teaching mathematics in schools has
become even more significant in today's world.
As emphasized by Tobias (1978) learning mathematics is intellectual but also emotional.
Learning mathematics is related with how students can solve mathematical operations, how
they can comprehend mathematical literacy and how they are competent in mathematics.
However, it should be also noted that learning mathematics is also related with how students
use their cognitive intelligences on how to succeed. On the one hand this suggests cognition
and emotion are intertwisted in learning mathematics. On the other hand, even though
mathematics and mathematical knowledge are used not only in schools but also regularly in
everyday lives, students may avoid learning mathematics due to negative emotional reactions.
Many studies (Aiken, 1970; Alkan, 2009; 2010; 2011 & 2013; Ashcraft, 1995; Baloğlu, 1999;
Bessant, 1992; Bourne, 1995; Campbell & Evans, 1997; Chipman, Krantz & Silver, 1992;
Dowker, Sarkar, & Looi, 2016; Gierl & Bisanz, 1995; Hembree, 1990; Izard, 1972; Kitchens,
1995; Ma & Xu, 2004; Peker & Ertekin, 2011; Posamentier & Stepelman, 1986; Richardson,
1980; Skiba, 1990; Şahin, 2004; Tobias, 1978; Tobias, 1990; Vukovic, Kieffer, Bailey &
Harari, 2013; Wu, Willcutt, Escovar & Menon; 2014; Zettle & Houghton, 1998; Zettle &
Raines, 2000) indicated that some students at different grades of schools have negative attitudes
towards mathematics which in turn cause feeling anxiety in mathematics. As suggested by given
studies, it can be said that there is a lack in considering affective features of students in
mathematics. In addition to this, it is suggested that students’ anxiety in mathematics is
attributable to such reasons like personality, parents, peers as well as teachers along with their
teaching strategies and styles.
It can be accepted that teachers are one of the most powerful influences on students’ learning
of mathematics. Bandura (1993) emphasized that “teachers’ beliefs in their personal efficacy
to motivate and promote learning affect the types of learning environments they create and the
level of academic progress their students achieve” (p. 117). From this point, it can be said that
self-efficacy can be the predictor of teachers’ effectiveness in mathematics (Hashmi & Shaikh,
2011; Swackhammer, Koellner, Basile, & Kimborough, 2009). Additionally, a wide body of
studies (Alkan, 2009; 2011; Fiore, 1999; Geist, 2010; Sheilds, 2006; Sloan, 2010; Stuart, 2000)
determined that teachers can cause, increase or reduce students’ anxiety in mathematics at all
levels of schooling on account of their attitudes and behaviours along with the teaching methods
and the instructional strategies they use.
Swars, Daane & Giesen (2006) stated that there was a negative relationship between self-
efficacy for teaching and mathematics anxiety. This means teacher with high level self-efficacy
can convey their confidence in mathematics to students (Mji & Arigbabu, 2012) whereas those
with low self-efficacy can cause students to feel negative attitudes towards mathematics. It was
found in studies that teachers who are mathematics anxious fail in conveying important
mathematical concepts and in allocating enough time for teaching these important concepts
(Alkan, 2009; Dunkle, 2010; Fiore, 1999; Hembree, 1990 and Stuart, 2000). It can be also
assumed that mathematics anxious teachers can transfer their negative attitudes in mathematics
to their students.
Learning mathematics and teaching mathematics can be affected not only by the level of
students’ anxiety but also by the level of teachers’ mathematics anxiety along with their
teaching anxiety in mathematics (Alkan, 2009, 2011 and Baloğlu, 2001). The results of some
studies indicated that there was a strong relation between teachers’ mathematics anxiety and
mathematics teaching anxiety (Bursal & Paznokas, 2006; Gresham, 2008; Swars et al., 2006).
Furthermore, it was found that teachers’ negative feelings and attitudes in teaching mathematics
can create anxiety and increase the level of anxiety of students in mathematics (Alkan, 2009,
507
Alkan, Coşguner & Fidan

2011; Baloğlu, 1999; Beilock & Willingham, 2014; Finlayson, 2014; Furner & Berman, 2003;
Sparks, 2011; Uusumaki & Nason, 2004; Vinson, 2001).
Mathematics teaching anxiety can be define as teachers’ feeling negative reaction to
mathematics, feeling under pressure to teach mathematics and being frustrated with the lack of
progress in mathematics. Teachers who feel anxiety in teaching mathematics might have fear
of explaining concepts, formulae and operations in mathematics. However, it should be noted
that mathematics is cumulative; there is a relation between prior knowledge, current and further
knowledge in mathematics. This means the teacher needs to clarify each topic in mathematics
in order not to cause students to fall behind. In addition to this, the teacher needs to help students
to comprehend each concepts and operations in mathematics clearly.
Ölmez and Cohen (2018) emphasized that teachers are expected to provide supportive
classroom setting in which lessening students’ negative feelings towards mathematics.
Furthermore, teachers are expected to enhance students’ involvement in mathematics by
helping to build connections with real-life situations and also building their self-confidence in
mathematics. Although these expectations are specified, it should be considered that teachers
having negative attitudes towards mathematics and teaching mathematics can fail in meeting
these. Therefore, it is crucial to find out the level of mathematics teaching anxiety of teachers
to deal with their anxieties in teaching mathematics.
As given in many studies above, there is an association between students’ negative feelings in
mathematics and teachers’ anxiety and teaching anxiety in mathematics. It should be noted that
feeling anxiety in mathematics can be started at primary school and raise at other levels of
schooling and can transfer to the professional life. Like teachers, prospective teachers’ teaching
efficacy and self-confidence in mathematics can have an impact on their learning mathematics
and then their teaching process (Hudson, Kloosterman& Galindo, 2012). Levine (1993; 1996)
claimed that prospective teachers have difficulties in teaching mathematics due to their teaching
anxiety. Hence, mathematics anxious prospective teachers may avoid mathematics and
mathematics related courses which in turn cause teaching in a way that unconsciously leading
their students to feel anxiety in mathematics.
Prospective teachers especially for primary schools are significant resources for future
mathematics lessons in schools and for improving future students’ self-efficacy in mathematics.
For this reason, it is needed to improve their teaching efficacy in mathematics in order to help
these future teachers to be successful in their teaching in mathematics (Ryang, 2012). Gurin
and et al, (2017) stated that there was a slight increase on studies conducted to find out the
relation between teachers’ mathematics anxiety and students’ mathematic anxiety. Moreover,
it is seen that there is a few studies focusing on prospective teachers’ teaching anxiety in
mathematics. These situations show that there is a need to investigate teachers’ and prospective
teachers’ mathematics teaching anxiety in order to find out the ways of diminishing their and
students’ anxiety in mathematics. It is assumed that the results of studies focusing on
mathematics teaching anxiety can contribute to the area of teaching mathematics. On the other
hand, there is also need to find out the level of prospective teachers’ mathematics teaching
anxiety in order to help them to reduce or overcome this anxiety. Consequently, this study
aimed to develop a scale for mathematics teaching anxiety based on prospective primary school
teachers’ perceptions.
2. METHOD
This study was designed in terms of quantitative approach to construct a scale for mathematics
teaching anxiety for prospective teachers. To this view, a scale development steps were used.

508
Int. J. Asst. Tools in Educ., Vol. 6, No. 3, (2019) pp. 506–521
2.1. Sampling
The participants of this study consisted of 956 prospective primary school teachers at Education
Faculties in Turkey. These participants were included in four different sampling groups. The
first group of this study was consisted of 404 prospective primary school teachers and 96
prospective teachers from this group were used in the application of open-ended questions and
308 of them (X(cid:3365)= 21.87, Sd = 1.83; female = 233, male = 75) were used for exploratory factor
analysis. A total of 305 (X(cid:3365)= 21.95, Sd = 1.31; Female = 234, Male = 71) prospective primary
school teachers in the second sampling group were used for confirmatory factor analysis, 108
prospective primary school teachers in the third group (X(cid:3365)= 21.80, Sd = 1.01; Female = 91, Male
= 10) were used for criterion validity studies. Lastly, 139 prospective primary school teachers
in the fourth sampling group (female = 111; male = 28) were included in test-retest reliability
studies.
2.2. Assessment Measures
During the development of the Turkish version of Mathematics Teaching Anxiety Scale
(MTAS), the steps proposed by De Vellis (2014), Tavşancıl (2006) and Erkuş (2014) were
followed. In order to develop the scale, first of all, the literature and assessment tools were
reviewed and examined. After that, the form including open-ended questions was given to
prospective primary school teachers and based on their answers 57 items were prepared for the
scale within the conceptual frame. Then, the draft scale form was sent to the experts who
worked on such topics as mathematics teaching, anxiety and mathematics anxiety. This
supported the content-related validity of the scale. In line with the recommendations of these
experts, 5 items were removed from the form and suggested corrections were done. After the
scale’s items were clarified according to the views, the original form of the scale consisting of
52 items was designed.
Items were rated on a 5-point Likert type ranging from 1 to 5. The ranges of the scale were 1
(Strongly disagree), 2 (Slightly agree), 3 (Partially agree), 4 (Mostly agree), and 5 (Completely
agree). Volunteer prospective primary school teachers were involved in data collection process.
Before the data collection the participants were informed about the study and the data collection
tool.
In order to perform confirmatory factor analysis, the Mathematics Teaching Efficacy Beliefs
Instrument (MTEBI) was used. This instrument was used to measure prospective teachers’
efficacy beliefs in teaching mathematics. The original scale was developed by Enochs, Smith
& Huinker (2000). Its first adaptation to Turkish was carried out by Çakıroğlu (2000), and the
second one was by Hacıömeroğlu & Şahin - Taşkın (2010). The current adapted version of the
scale was used in the present study. This instrument was consisted of 17 items and 7 out of
these items were scored reversely.
2.3. Data Analysis
SPSS 22.00 package program and AMOS 18.00 program were used to analyse the data. The
principal component analysis within the scope of exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was
performed using the Kaiser Criteria (eigenvalue> 1). After finding by the exploratory factor
analysis that the scale was uni-dimensional, the Cronbach Alpha coefficient was calculated to
determine the internal consistency of the scale. Confirmatory factor analysis was done with the
help of AMOS 18.00 program (Byrne, 2009). For the criterion validity of the scale, Pearson
product moment correlation coefficient was measured between the Mathematics Teaching
Efficacy Belief Instrument (MTEBI) and the scale. In the analysis phase, whether the data had
a univariate normal distribution in each study group was examined at first. It was determined
that the data obtained from all study groups had a univariate normal distribution and the
skewness and kurtosis values were between -1 and +1 (Muthén & Kaplan, 1985).
509
Alkan, Coşguner & Fidan

3. RESULTS
3.1. Exploratory Factor Analysis
While doing the Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), primarily the data gathered from the study
group with whom MTAS consisting of 52 items applied was investigated. In this context, the
chi-square value of the Bartlett Sphericity Test was found to be significant with 8973.88 (p
<0.000), and the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin value (0.949) was found to be sufficient. In the light of
these results, it was determined that the data obtained from the first study group was suitable
for factor analysis (Albayrak, 2006; Şencan, 2005). In order to determine the factor structure of
the MTAS, a single-factor structure consisting of 31 items was determined as a result of the
principal components analysis carried out based on the criteria of screen-plot and eigenvalue>
1.0 and it was revealed that this structure explained 47.43% of the total variance (Kline, 1994).
The Cronbach Alpha coefficient was preferred in the calculation of the reliability coefficient of
the MTAS, since it yielded consistent results in determining the reliability of the assessment
tools with a single factor structure (Tan, 2009). In this respect, the lowest acceptable value for
Chronbach Alpha coefficient was determined to be ≥ 0.70. The reliability value of the MTAS
was found to be 0.96, which is a high value (Hair, Anderson, Tatham & Black, 1998; Nunnally
& Bernstein, 1994). The test-retest reliability coefficient of the MTAS was calculated to be
0.703 and this value was considered equal to the acceptable limit value. The factor loadings of
the items on the MTAS, common variance and Cronbach Alpha coefficient for the single-factor
structure of the scale is given in Table 1.
Table 1. Results of the Exploratory Factor Analysis of Mathematics Teaching Anxiety Scale (N = 308)
Item Common
Item Factor 1
No Variance
M29 When a student does not understand mathematical operations, I get anxious about how
to explain them. 0.770 0.613
Matematiksel işlemleri öğrenci anlamadığında nasıl açıklayacağım endişesi yaşarım.
M27 A rise in the level differences among my students while teaching mathematics worries
me.
0.747 0.591
Matematik dersini işlerken öğrencilerim arasında düzey farklılıklarının artmasından
endişelenirim.
M40 Until I gain experience in teaching, I feel fear about my lack of conveying mathematical
concepts on time.
0.737 0.631
Deneyim kazanana kadar matematik kavramlarını zamanında kazandıramamaktan
korkarım.
M44 I feel worry about not being able to teach in mathematics according to my students’
level. 0.732 0.539
Matematik dersini öğrencilerimin düzeylerine göre anlatamayacağım endişesi yaşarım.
M23 The thought that I cannot concretize the abstract concepts in mathematics frightens me.
0.730 0.599
Matematik dersinde soyut kavramları somutlaştıramama düşüncesi beni korkutur.
M35 I feel anxious while considering students’ individual differences in teaching
mathematics.
0.729 0.646
Matematik öğretirken bireysel farklılıkları göz önünde bulundurma zorunluluğu beni
endişelendirir.
M43 I feel worry that I do not know how to teach mathematical concepts to students.
Matematik kavramlarını kazandırırken nasıl öğreteceğimi bilmediğim için tedirgin 0.726 0.605
olurum.
M46 I feel anxious that I may fail in bringing my students having different readiness levels 0.724 0.559
to the same level in mathematics.
Matematik dersinde hazırbulunuşluk düzeyi farklı olan öğrencilerimi aynı düzeye
getiremeyeceğim endişesi yaşarım.
M26 I feel anxious about not relating the content of mathematics with students’ daily lives.
Matematik dersinde işlenecek konuyu günlük yaşamla ilişkilendiremeyeceğim endişesi 0.722 0.635
yaşarım.

510
Int. J. Asst. Tools in Educ., Vol. 6, No. 3, (2019) pp. 506–521
Table 1. Continues
Item Common
Item Factor 1
No Variance
M31 I feel anxious that I cannot finish the outcomes of the mathematics curriculum on time.
0.722 0.525
Matematik programındaki kazanımları zamanında bitiremeyeceğim endişesi yaşarım.
M50 I'm afraid of losing my classroom control if I cannot solve the problems in
mathematics.
0.719 0.752
Matematik dersinde problemleri çözemezsem sınıftaki hâkimiyetimi kaybetmekten
korkarım.
M52 I feel anxious about how I'm going to teach the subjects that I feel incompetent in 0.705 0.587
mathematics.
Matematik dersinde kendimi yeterli hissetmediğim konuları öğrencilerime nasıl
kazandıracağım endişesi yaşarım.
M25 I'm worried about not using the appropriate method and technique in mathematics. 0.697 0.589
Matematik dersine uygun yöntem ve tekniği kullanamama endişesi yaşarım.
M41 I'm worried about not enabling my students' to engage in mathematics actively. 0.696 0.630
Öğrencilerimin matematik dersine aktif katılımını sağlayamama endişesi yaşarım.
M22 The thought that the student cannot comprehend when I turn a concept into a 0.696 0.586
mathematical sentence (e.g. 2 + 3) makes me anxious.
Bir kavramı matematiksel cümleye (ör: 2+3) dönüştürdüğümde öğrencinin
anlayamayacağı düşüncesi beni tedirgin eder.
M34 I get anxious about designing activities that are appropriate for my students’ level in 0.695 0.554
mathematics.
Matematik dersinde öğrencilerimin düzeyine uygun etkinlik hazırlama endişesi
yaşarım.
M49 The thought that the level differences of the students in mathematics may reduce the 0.692 0.561
interest of attending the lesson disturbs me.
Matematik dersinde öğrencilerin düzey farklılıklarının derse olan ilgiyi azaltacağı
düşüncesi beni rahatsız eder.
M39 I feel uneasy with the thought that I cannot enable my students to like mathematics. 0.679 0.671
Matematiği sevdiremeyeceğim düşüncesi beni huzursuz eder.
M18 I am afraid that the level differences of the students in mathematics may affect my 0.674 0.558
teaching pace.
Matematik dersinde öğrencilerin düzey farklılıklarının ders işleme hızımı
etkilemesinden korkarım.
M21 I am afraid that students with fewer interests in mathematics may reduce the interest 0.674 0.608
of other students.
Matematik dersine ilgisi az olan öğrencilerin diğer öğrencilerin ilgisini azaltmasından
korkarım.
M37 I am afraid that families will criticize me if I cannot catch up with the mathematics 0.672 0.495
curriculum.
Matematik programını yetiştiremezsem ailelerin beni eleştirmesinden huzursuz
olurum.
M33 I am afraid that school administrators will criticize me if I cannot catch up with the 0.659 0.509
mathematics curriculum.
Matematik programını yetiştiremezsem okul yöneticilerinin beni eleştirmesinden
korkarım.
M19 The fact that my students have different readiness levels in mathematics frightens me 0.656 0.621
in the early years of my professional life.
Meslek yaşantımın ilk yıllarında öğrencilerimin matematik dersindeki hazırbulunuşluk
düzeylerinin farklı olması beni korkutur.
M28 I am anxious since I believe that I do not have sufficient knowledge about teaching 0.651 0.634
mathematics.
Matematik öğretimine yönelik yeterli bilgiye sahip olmadığımı düşündüğümden
endişelenirim.
M48 I feel fear of being humiliated by the students if I cannot solve problems in 0.648 0.636
mathematics. Matematik dersinde problemleri çözemezsem öğrencilerin gözünde
küçük düşmekten korkarım.
M24 It makes me uncomfortable to know that the next lesson I will teach is mathematics. 0.647 0.693
İşleyeceğim bir sonraki dersin matematik olduğunu bilmek beni huzursuz eder.
511
Alkan, Coşguner & Fidan

Table 1. Continues
M15 I feel anxious if the differences in the level of the students in mathematics affect my 0.630 0.599
classroom management.
Öğrencilerin matematik dersindeki düzey farklılıklarının sınıf hâkimiyetimi
etkilemesinden endişelenirim.
M30 I feel insecure about the thought that my students having level differences in 0.606 0.615
mathematics can isolate themselves from the class eventually.
Matematik dersinde düzey farklılıkları olan öğrencilerimin zamanla kendilerini
sınıftan soyutlayabilecekleri düşüncesi beni huzursuz eder.
M3 I'm worried that I cannot motivate the students due to my prejudices against 0.585 0.455
mathematics.
Matematiğe yönelik önyargılarımdan dolayı öğrencileri motive edemeyeceğim
endişesi yaşarım.
M13 I feel uncomfortable in mathematics since I do not have enough experience. 0.585 0.414
Yeterli deneyime sahip olmadığım için matematik dersinde kendimi huzursuz
hissederim.
Chronbach’s Alpha Coefficient: 0.96
3.2. Confirmatory Factor Analysis
AMOS 18.00 program was used in order to perform the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of
the MTAS and maximum likelihood method was opted for the estimation of model parameters
(Tezbaşaran, 1997). The structure consisting of 31 items and one dimension as a result of
exploratory factor analysis was tested via confirmatory factor analysis. The result of the analysis
indicated that some of the items exhibited a high correlation with each other.
In this respect, the items exhibiting correlations were removed from the scale. Yet, after
suggested modifications, the scale MTAS was constructed with 19 items and one dimension.
The confirmatory factor analysis values of the MTAS and the suggested are illustrated in Figure
1.
It is stated that there are three types of fit that are practical for all fit measures and can be
represented as absolute, incremental and restricted fit in the CFA (Schumacker and Lomax,
2010). In this study, X2, RMSEA, GFI and RMR were used to evaluate the absolute fit. AGFI,
NFI, TLI, CFI, RFI and IFI were used as incremental fit measures. The fit values for CFA are
shown in Table 2.
Table 2. Goodness of Fit Indices in the Confirmatory Factor Analysis
X2 X2/df p-value RMSEA GFI RMR AGFI NFI TLI CFI RFI IFI
220.963* 1.483 0.000 0.040 0.928 0.050 0.908 0.930 0.972 0.976 0.919 0.976
* p<0.01
When Table 2 is examined, it is seen that X2 value (X2 = 220.963; df = 126, p <0.01) is
significant (Timm, 2002). However, this statistic is considered to be a weak absolute fit (Timm,
2002). When the relevant literature is reviewed, it is observed that X2 value is significant in
large samples (Byrne, 1989). For this reason, X2/df, which is another proposed statistic, was
calculated and it was found that this statistic (0≤ X2/df=1.483 ≤ 2) showed good fit (Kline, 2011;
Sümer, 2000). When the other fit indices were examined, it was observed that RMSEA (0.040),
RMR (0.050), AGFI (0.908), TLI (0.972), CFI (0.976) and IFI (0.976) showed a good fit. The
indices with acceptable fit values included GFI (0.928), NFI (0.930) and RFI (0.919) (Hair,
Black, Babin & Anderson, 2014; Browne & Cudeck, 1993; Baumgartner & Homburg, 1996;
Bentler, 1980; Bentler & Bonett, 1980; Marsh, Hau, Artelt, Baumert & Peschar, 2006;
Schermelleh–Engel & Moosbrugger, 2003; Kline,1991). When these values are examined, it
can be stated that the MTAS has a good fit. Table 3 shows the 19-item MTAS, standardized
factor loadings and standard error values of this scale.
512
Int. J. Asst. Tools in Educ., Vol. 6, No. 3, (2019) pp. 506–521

Figure 1. Results of the Confirmatory Factor Analysis of MTAS
Table 3. Confirmatory Factor Analysis Item Statistics
Standardized
Item No Factor S.E.
Loadings
M3 I'm worried that I cannot motivate the students due to my prejudices against 0.577
mathematics.
Matematiğe yönelik önyargılarımdan dolayı öğrencileri motive edemeyeceğim
endişesi yaşarım.
M13 I feel uncomfortable in mathematics since I do not have enough experience. 0.580 0.096
Yeterli deneyime sahip olmadığım için matematik dersinde kendimi huzursuz
hissederim.
M18 I am afraid that the level differences of the students in mathematics may affect 0.614 0.111
my teaching pace.
Matematik dersinde öğrencilerin düzey farklılıklarının ders işleme hızımı
etkilemesinden korkarım.
M21 I am afraid that students with fewer interests in mathematics may reduce the 0.647 0.119
interest of other students.
Matematik dersine ilgisi az olan öğrencilerin diğer öğrencilerin ilgisini
azaltmasından korkarım.
M22 The thought that the student cannot comprehend when I turn a concept into a 0.705 0.127
mathematical sentence (e.g. 2 + 3) makes me anxious.
Bir kavramı matematiksel cümleye (ör: 2+3) dönüştürdüğümde öğrencinin
anlayamayacağı düşüncesi beni tedirgin eder.
M25 I'm worried about not using the appropriate method and technique in 0.740 0.120
mathematics.
Matematik dersine uygun yöntem ve tekniği kullanamama endişesi yaşarım.
M27 A rise in the level differences among my students while teaching mathematics 0.684 0.117
worries me.
Matematik dersini işlerken öğrencilerim arasında düzey farklılıklarının
artmasından endişelenirim.
513
Alkan, Coşguner & Fidan

Table 3. Continues
Standardized
Item
Factor S.E.
No
Loadings
M28 I am anxious since I believe that I do not have sufficient knowledge about 0.783 0.134
teaching mathematics.
Matematik öğretimine yönelik yeterli bilgiye sahip olmadığımı
düşündüğümden endişelenirim.
M29 When a student does not understand mathematical operations, I get anxious 0.800 0.129
about how to explain them.
Matematiksel işlemleri öğrenci anlamadığında nasıl açıklayacağım endişesi
yaşarım.
M30 I feel insecure about the thought that my students having level differences in 0.628 0.125
mathematics can isolate themselves from the class eventually.
Matematik dersinde düzey farklılıkları olan öğrencilerimin zamanla
kendilerini sınıftan soyutlayabilecekleri düşüncesi beni huzursuz eder.
M31 I feel anxious that I cannot finish the outcomes of the mathematics curriculum 0.770 0.124
on time.
Matematik programındaki kazanımları zamanında bitiremeyeceğim endişesi
yaşarım.
M33 I am afraid that school administrators will criticize me if I cannot catch up with 0.757 0.129
the mathematics curriculum.
Matematik programını yetiştiremezsem okul yöneticilerinin beni
eleştirmesinden korkarım
M34 I get anxious about designing activities that are appropriate for my students’ 0.757 0.125
level in mathematics.
Matematik dersinde öğrencilerimin düzeyine uygun etkinlik hazırlama
endişesi yaşarım.
M35 I feel anxious while considering students’ individual differences in teaching 0.767 0.122
mathematics.
Matematik öğretirken bireysel farklılıkları göz önünde bulundurma
zorunluluğu beni endişelendirir.
M37 I am afraid that families will criticize me if I cannot catch up with the
0.701 0.120
mathematics curriculum.

Matematik programını yetiştiremezsem ailelerin beni eleştirmesinden

huzursuz olurum.
M41 I'm worried about not enabling my students' to engage in mathematics actively. 0.469 0.157
Öğrencilerimin matematik dersine aktif katılımını sağlayamama endişesi
yaşarım.
M43 I feel worry that I do not know how to teach mathematical concepts to students. 0.709 0.119
Matematik kavramlarını kazandırırken nasıl öğreteceğimi bilmediğim için
tedirgin olurum.
M48 I feel fear of being humiliated by the students if I cannot solve problems in 0.427 0.203
mathematics.
Matematik dersinde problemleri çözemezsem öğrencilerin gözünde küçük
düşmekten korkarım.
M49 The thought that the level differences of the students in mathematics may 0.660 0.115
reduce the interest of attending the lesson disturbs me.
Matematik dersinde öğrencilerin düzey farklılıklarının derse olan ilgiyi
azaltacağı düşüncesi beni rahatsız eder.
Chronbach’s Alpha: 0.93
3.3. Criterion Validity
Within the scope of the criterion validity studies of the MTAS, prospective primary school
teachers in the third group were asked to fill in the Mathematics Teaching Efficacy Belief
Instrument and the Mathematics Teaching Anxiety Scale in order to measure the Pearson
514
Int. J. Asst. Tools in Educ., Vol. 6, No. 3, (2019) pp. 506–521
product moment correlation coefficient. It was found that the correlation coefficient showed a
moderately negative (r = –0.43) and significant (p <0.01, n = 108) relationship (Büyüköztürk,
2012; Field, 2009). In the light of these results, it can be said that the MTAS has concurrent
validity.
4. CONCLUSION
This study aimed to develop and examine a scale for measuring mathematics teaching anxiety
(MTAS) for prospective primary school teachers. To this aim, 956 prospective primary school
teachers were involved in this study in order to construct and to prove the validity and reliability
of the scale. At the beginning of the study, a scale was designed with 57 items and sent to
experts for content-related validity. After their judgements, the scale was structured with 52
items.
Before the factor analysis process, it was found that the chi-square value of the Bartlett
Sphericity Test was significant with 8973.88 (p <0.000), and the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin value was
sufficient (0.949). According to the results of the exploratory factor analysis, it was found that
the scale indicates single factor structure and consisting of 31 items. The reliability value of the
scale with 31 items was found to be 0.96, which is a high value. In addition to this, the test-
retest reliability coefficient was calculated to be 0,703 was considered equal to the acceptable
limit value.
Confirmatory factor analysis was also used to determine the correlations among items. In this
analysis, it was found that some items were exhibiting high correlations; therefore, those items
were removed from the scale. As a result, the structure of the scale was constructed with 19
items. In terms of CFA results (0≤X2 / df = 1.483≤2, RMSEA = 0.040, RMR = 0.050, AGFI
= 0.908, TLI = 0.972, CFI = 0.976, IFI = 0.976, GFI = 0.928, NFI = 0.930 and RFI = 0.919), it
was confirmed that the scale structure was consisting of 19 items and one dimension.
Thereafter, the criterion validity was measured and found that the scale has concurrent validity.
In conclusion, the final form of Mathematics Teaching Anxiety Scale (MTAS) for prospective
primary school teachers was consisting of 19 items and the Cronbach's alpha coefficient of this
scale was 0.93. It is believed that this MTAS can contribute to the area by helping to measure
the level of prospective teachers’ mathematics teaching anxiety. Furthermore, this scale could
be one of the measurements in the area which can help other research to construct new scales
and to focus on mathematics teaching anxiety in various ways.
ORCID
Vesile ALKAN https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8630-3357
5. REFERENCES
Aiken, L. R. (1970). Attitudes toward mathematics. Review of Educational Research, 40 (4),
551–596.
Albayrak, A. S. (2006). Uygulamalı Çok Değişkenli İstatistik Teknikleri. Ankara: Asil Yayın
Dağıtım.
Alkan, V. (2009). The Relationship between teaching strategies and styles and pupils’ anxiety
in mathematics at primary schools in Turkey. Unpublished PhD Thesis. The University
of Nottingham.
Alkan, V. (2010). Matematikten nefret ediyorum! [I hate Mathematics!]. Pamukkale
Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi [Pamukkale University Journal of Education], 28
(II), 189-199.
Alkan, V. (2011). Etkili matematik öğretiminin gerçekleştirilmesindeki engellerden biri: kaygı
ve nedenleri [One of the barriers to providing effective mathematics teaching: anxiety
515